Summary: | 碩士 === 國立臺北教育大學 === 自然科學教育學系 === 103 === The conventional instruction and a situated e-learning instructional approach were used for teaching “The Sound and Instruments” in 6th-grade classes. For the purpose of knowing the effectiveness of students’ learning in terms of their creativities, students’ tendency of creativity, creative thinking and their innovative products developed in their classes were evaluated and compared. For the need of future implementation of evaluating students creativity based on their creative products, this study also compared the consistency of experts’ evaluation and students’ peer-evaluation, so that these evolutional practices can be adopted in a more proper way.
The subjects of the study were four classes of 6th grade students at a large elementary school in Tucheng, New Taipei City, Taiwan. Two of the classes (50 students) were the experiment group while the other two classes (47 students) were the control group; both groups received 4 weeks’ teaching. The t-test was used to analyze the change of students’ tendency of creativity and creative thinking in the experiment group; single-factor ANCOVA is used to analyze and compare the differences of students’ tendency of creativity and creative thinking between the two groups. The Mann–Whitney U Test is utilized for analysis of the differences between innovative products of the students in two groups. Finally, the differences between expert and student evaluation of the innovative products are analyzed by the Mann–Whitney U Test and Spearman rank analysis. The results of this study were:
1. The tendency of creativity: there were no significant differences between the two groups and neither group showed significant changes between their pre- and post-tests.
2. Creative thinking: the experiment group showed significant growth when comparing with the control group. When look into the sub-dimensions, the experimental group showed significantly more growth in openness and originality than the control group; yet, there were no significant differences in flexibility and fluency. Furthermore, both groups showed significant growth in their post-tests when comparing with the pre-test, however, there were no significant differences between the two groups in this component.
3. Innovative products: The experimental group showed significantly superior innovative products than the control group.
4. Expert evaluation and student peer evaluation on students’ innovative products: After evaluation training, there were no significant differences between expert evaluation and student peer evaluation.
In summary, integrating creative thinking into situated e-learning instructional approach was capable of enhancing student creativity, in general. Furthermore, the result that there was no significant differences between experts’ or students’ evaluation, revealed the feasibility of implementing students’ peer evaluation on innovative products in future classes.
|